Religious Land Uses, Zoning, and the Courts

Archives: Settlement

Chabad Jewish Center of Toms River, Inc. (“Chabad”) has settled its religious discrimination lawsuit against the Township of Toms River, New Jersey (“Township”), putting to rest its allegations that the Township violated each of RLUIPA’s provisions by requiring Chabad to obtain a variance to continue to use its property (“Property”) as a Chabad house, house … Continue Reading

In December, we reported that the Mahwah Township Council (“Council”) voted to withdraw two ordinances at the center of RLUIPA litigation involving the expansion of an eruv proposed by Bergen Rockland Eruv Association (“BREA”). According to Chabad.org, an eruv (pronounced (ay-roov) is “a technical boundary that allows Jews to carry in public areas on Shabbat.” The … Continue Reading

The City of Bayonne, New Jersey has agreed to settle a lawsuit filed this past summer by Bayonne Muslims, asserting that the city discriminated against the Muslim group after denying variances needed to convert an abandoned warehouse to a mosque (read our previous post about the lawsuit here). As part of the settlement, the city … Continue Reading

Guest Post by Derek Valentine Following some last minute hand-wringing, nearly a year of hearings and deliberations by the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) and accusations of religious bias, the Town of Dudley agreed to a deal that would allow a proposed Muslim cemetery to be constructed on six acres of former farmland in a … Continue Reading

In 2011, Pittsfield Charter Township denied, allegedly without deliberation, Michigan Islamic Academy’s (“MIA”) application to rezone a 26 acre parcel (the “Property”) to allow the development of a pre-K through grade 12 school. MIA then sued the Township, alleging that the denial substantially burdened its religious exercise. At the time, MIA operated a school in … Continue Reading

We previously reported about the federal lawsuit filed by Christian Community Chapel against the Township of Hillsborough, New Jersey, in which the Township denied the Chapel’s variance requests to use a 14.3 acre property as a parsonage with a 150-seat worship facility. Although the Township voted 4-3 in favor of the Chapel’s proposal, the application … Continue Reading

Disclaimer

This Blog/Website is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Website publisher. The Blog/Website should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. Any opinions expressed on this Blog/Website are opinions only of the author, expressed at the time the material is written based on information available to the author at that time, and are not opinions of the author's law firm or any of the author's or the law firm's clients. This Blog/Website is not intended to be attorney advertising. To the extent it might be deemed to be attorney advertising, it should not be considered advertising or to be seeking legal work in any jurisdiction in which the author is not admitted to practice law (i.e., jurisdictions other than Connecticut, Massachusetts, and various federal courts).

Stay Connected

About Robinson+Cole's RLUIPA Group

Robinson+Cole is a law firm serving regional, national and global clients from nine offices throughout the Northeast. Based in Hartford, Connecticut, Robinson+Cole’s RLUIPA Group represents developers; local governments; landowners; and advocacy groups in land development and conservation matters throughout the United States, with the assistance of local counsel when necessary.